You will dislike this observation intensely. But if those figures are correct SNP would sweep all the constituencies. There is little harm in some SNP supporters giving their list votes to other pro-Indy groups where they are deserving. I would give my list vote to Tommy Sheridan were I in Glasgow. It would then have the full weight of one vote, and not count as an eighth of a vote as it would if given to the SNP.

If I lived where the anti-gay and anti-abortion bigot Sophie Coyle tops the SNP list, I would not give the SNP my list vote. Would you? Not a hypothetical question - I should like an answer.

As it happens, I am giving both my own votes to the SNP, because of where I live and who are the candidates. But I find the unthinking rigidity of your own position puzzling.

And you may dislike my response even more intensely, Craig, because "if" is literally the only word in your point that matters. If pre-election polls were accurate "predictions", Ed Miliband would currently be Prime Minister, and Neil Kinnock would be a distinguished ex-PM.

This nonsense about SNP votes only "counting for one-eighth" seems to be taking root in some quarters, but it really is nonsense. Maybe I'll devote a whole blogpost to that point when I have more time.

I live in Central Scotland where Sophia Coyle is standing, and yes of course I'll be voting SNP on the list. I want an SNP majority government.

only mugs thoughts Miliband would be pm. I argued for months it would be Cameron and made plenty of cash on it too. Looking for a place to unload on SNP majority and on SNP majority based on constituencies alone. Do you have a link to the data tables by the way? thanks

In any case, putting the poll figures into Scotland Votes shows SNP winning 68 constituencies, not 73. What % shift would be needed for that to drop to 64? Who thinks the best way to gain independence is for the SNP to lose their majority? That's the risk tactical voters are taking.

Scotland votes is rubbish. Anyway, a 53% vote for SNP given the split of the rest will easily return a majority for SNP.

The key point when compared with the 2011 Holyrood election is the collapse in the Labour vote. This means that if SNP defied every single poll in the last year and got only 45.4% of the constituency vote (and they'll get a lot more than that), they'd get much than the 53 they got on the constituency in 2011. Try it for yourself. Just take 10 percent off labour 2011 give the tories 5 and others 5 (UKIP it's called but would also capture RISE, and green etc). SNP are predicted with the rubbish Scotland votes calculator as getting a majority on the constituency alone with 45% of the vote. And it makes sense as their competition in the vast majority of seats has collapsed.

Cutbot seat forecast based on this poll is even more on a knife-edge - 64+3 seats to the SNP as they somewhat surprisingly give Glasgow Kelvin and Edinburgh Central seats to the Greens(!), 5 seats to the Conservatives and Orkney & Shetland to the LibDems.

I think the complexity of the Scottish electoral system makes this election very difficult to call. I use the Scotland Votes calculator but it is my understanding that it doesn't consider regional splits in its calculations - is that correct? So you could have Greens on 10% of the list vote but if most of those votes are concentrated in one area (Glasgow for example), then they may face an uphill struggle in actually converting their votes into seats.

Going forward I think we need a simpler system for the Holyrood parliament. These voting systems should be transparent and easy to understand. How likely is it that your ordinary man in the street, chosen at random, understands the D'Hondt system? You could have two chambers - one constituency based (AV), one pure PR (varying in size as required to represent the proportion of the vote won by each party).

Cutbot seen to have some technical problems in that they are allocating all the Other's vote nationally to whichever constituency candidates standing. Of course the vast majority of the people who say they are voting Green will turn up and find they can't vote for them in the constituency, but Cutbot seems to squeeze all those votes into two constituencies (less so Coatbridge) giving them a big 'swing' on top of an initial 2011 'vote' that didn't actually exist but which they put in the high teens.

The thing is, nobody needs to understand d'Hondt. Vote in the constituency for the candidate you prefer. There may be some tactical voting here, but it's the same equation as in Westminster seats and people seem to manage.

Vote on the list for the party you support, or the party you really want to see in government.

End of. All this malarkey about "but what if the party I want to see in government gets a lot of constituency seats" is angels dancing on the head of a pin and is muddying the waters to no good effect. Down that rabbit hole madness lies. It's Russian roulette with five barrels loaded.

Just vote for the party whose policies you most identify with or which you'd prefer to form the government (if these aren't the same thing, which in most cases they will be) and the result will be fair.

I have encountered this type of argument before. The lists have people like Anus, Jabbba, Rennie, Dippity Dug and Tank Commander on them.

It is in the nature of the list system used here that the voters don't get to select which candidates they elect. It is for the party ( members sometimes ) to rank those.

The SNP is a broad church with the highest percentage of elected MP's of any party being gay. But it also has elected members of many faiths - ad none, many differing political positions and many shades of opinion on all manner of issues. I have encountered voters for whom the sexuality of my SNP candidate is a problem. In my opinion it is of no interest who they sleep with.

So if I was to accept that the voter was 100% right to be concerned and to decline to vote SNP because they were biased against my lesbian candidate would that be fine by your measure?

The SNP is a party which seeks to restore Scotland's independence. Above all the other differences, the candidates agree that is their top priority. That and the competent record in government are why you vote SNP. I do not agree with the views of several candidates on the theme you highlight. But they represent a view which is shared by some in the community. Hold your nose and vote in that knowledge, but realise that our LGBT record stands up to scrutiny.

I do not think it is a coincidence that the SNP list vote in poll after poll appears to be roughly equal to the SNP constituency vote minus the Green list vote. That may just be the real Green vote that has decided to vote SNP in the constituencies due to the lack of a pro-indy alternative. On the other hand, it may down to a successful "split your indy vote" campaign by the Greens. If so, it could damage the indy cause if the SNP constituency vote is being over-egged by the polls and more unionists get elected than is being predicted in the constituencies.

In my opinion, the SNP list and constituency votes will converge on polling day as any "split voters" get a bit jittery about the risks of that strategy and go SNPx2 at the last moment. Just as some Yes voters got jittery in the final days of the referendum and voted No at the last minute. Its human nature.

An interesting poll. We will need to see what the actual question wording for the List was as the exact wording can make a difference.

If there is a grain of truth in the Constituency figures then it will be difficult for some existing mainland non-SNP MSP's to buck the trend unless they have a sizeable concentration of support in their particular seat.

In 2011 Labour only dropped a half a percentage point in the Constituency vote mainly because the LD vote collapse and masked the defection from Labour to SNP. This time there is no votes spare to offset what looks like a mass defection from Labour to the SNP.

Q2. In the next Scottish Parliament election you will be given two votes. Your first vote will be for a single person to represent your constituency in the Scottish Parliament. If the election were tomorrow, which party would you be most likely to vote for with your first, constituency vote?

Q3. Your second vote will be a party list vote to elect representatives from your region of Scotland by a form of proportional representation. If the election were tomorrow, which party would you be most likely to vote

I'm not quite sure what James's objections are, unless he's thinking of a previous version. I suppose you could include "you may may vote for the party you voted for in the constituency or a different one" but most people seem to realise that from the voting patterns and I don't think other pollsters are that explicit either. Indeed you might argue that such wording might encourage people to switch.

erratum - This time there are no votes spare to offset what looks like a mass defection from Labour to the SNP. The Labour vote went up in a few seat in 2011 because they attracted disaffected LD votes.

Any thoughts on what it will mean for the Unionist cause if SCON supplants SLAB as the main opposition? It would mean the SNP's only opponent which has ever formed a government in Scotland, and which could plausibly do so in the remotely foreseeable future, would be turned into a total sideshow.

If I were a big Unionist, I'd want Labour to hang onto second place, or any prospect of getting rid of the Nats recedes even further into the background.

I know what you mean. But you could also take the view that if conservatism in Scotland can be given a boost (and becoming the official opposition is one hell of a boost), then it badly damages the nationalist narrative of Scotland being ruled by a party that it never votes for - namely the conservatives. If you begin removing the underlying reasons for the Nationalists' popularity then eventually they will crumble. Perhaps that is a better strategy than having a Labour opposition that doesn't really oppose and has, in my opinion, gone soft on upholding the union. They are embarrassed about their role in the referendum - the tories couldn't be more proud.

I'm not really sure having the Tories as the only strong unionist party in Scotland would really be a 'blow for the SNP'. Quite the opposite I'd have thought. It would be a bit like having say the BNP as the only unionist party of note, just slightly less awkward.

It was the Labour vote and the fact that Labour still win sometimes in London that has held the UK together since the Tories became a minor party post-1997.

Also, is 1-2% up on May 2015 really a 'boost'? Isn't that more 'going nowhere', particularly given the collapse of Labour should have opened up opportunities for grabbing votes?

Oh and Goldie was getting much higher ratings than Ruth ahead of May 2011. Worth noting.

then it badly damages the nationalist narrative of Scotland being ruled by a party that it never votes for - namely the conservatives.

"Badly damages" is a stretch. Scotland still wouldn't have voted for the Conservatives. On this poll, they'd be joint third with Labour in terms of share of the vote, miles behind the SNP, 10% behind Labour at Westminster - and yet still our government.

There's certainly some truth in the idea that any convergence of the political situations in Scotland and the rUK weakens the case for independence, but it's hard to see how a minor shift like this (due far more to Labour's collapse than any slight strengthening by the Tories) outweighs the benefit to the SNP of seeing their primary opponents annihilated and replaced by considerably less dangerous ones.

I think for all the public bluster, Ruthie might be more pragmatic. SLAB voted against things last term just because the SNP suggested them. And perhaps the quality of PMQ's will improve when the questions are not being asked by such poor excuses for representatives as Labour sent to Holyrood last time.

But which side will Union Jackie take once the Labour party are neither the government nor the official opposition? The MOT are the ones with the biggest problem. Who do they hate more? SNP or RDP?

Last time I looked the BNP wanted to send back "the blacks" in return for agreeing to purchase their bananas. They wanted to scrap the Northern Ireland peace deal, ban abortion, outlaw gay marriage and implement economically Marxist policies. To compare the Tories with them is just plain nonsensical.

Looking at the actual polling data you can see where the way of asking the questions falls down. There have been various attempts since the first election to stop people thinking of the list vote being a second choice.

Table 6 on Page 9 shows a lot of voters who seem to be voting a split, even between parties that you'd not think would happen. However it does seem a lot of SNP constituency voters are voting Green. 43 out of 445 on the adjusted total. Surprisingly the next non-SNP pick for someone who intends to vote SNP at constituency level is 24 undecided.

In other words there a category of undecided voter who might opt for SNP or Green on the day boosting both their votes.

This is indeed important, a smart tactical voter will wait till the last possible moment to make the most accurate prediction based on the polling. I'm 90% sure that a SNP/Green split vote will be the best outcome in Glasgow but I will wait till the day before to make up my mind.

The real problem is the idiots who will be voting for Solidarity or RISE who have no chance of winning an MSP but may well deny the Greens a second list seat in Glasgow at least (probably not elsewhere).

It needs to be made clear that a Split vote is ONLY SNP/Green and cannot work if its SNP/(another Indy party). A vote for Solidarity or RISE is 100% a wasted vote in all circumstances.

If Labour is polling 43% of the pro union vote in Scotland,how does that compare with Labour in England? I think it will very similair.So it could be argued Kezia Dugdale is doing rather well as Labour Party leader in Scotland.

Labour in England have twice the vote share that SLAB do, and are only a few points behind the Tories (occasionally even overtaking them). And this is up against a UK government which has been in office for three years less than the SNP. It's hard to see how anyone could argue that Kezia is doing well.

Jim Murphy will be relieved: "least successful SLAB leader of all time" may be about to be removed from his epitaph.

The Unionists won the referendum. The Unionists are divided by ideology unlike the Nat sis who like sheep toe the line.Socialism is now dead in the Nat si party. Tory policies are now the domain of the Nat si Tartan Tories.There will be no referendum in Scotland now for around at least a decade. Tory policies will prevail if the Nat sis retain power.

The fact is that the Unionist Parties are gonna get yet another kicking in 2016, after the kicking they got in 2015.

Scottish People will, yet again, elect the SNP for another 5 years and the Unionist Parties will be, yet again,booted in their falsies.

As Cameron's personal standing with Scots sinks to that of a ripe turd and the word "Conservative" is totally banned from all Scottish hustings/platforms, by wee Ruthie - and Kezia sinks lower poll by poll - the writing on the wall is now so large that even Planks like you can see it.

Lib Dems don't translate into national polls well. They have concentrated support in certain areas - indeed, they increased the number of votes cast for them in several of the seats they were defending during 2015, even as they lost 240,000 votes nationally.

In any case, their national share last year was 7.5%. So the polls suggests little has changed for them. Their decline has turned into a plateau, which is something Scottish Labour can't say yet.

Could you two patent it before Scotland walks away from the faux Union? Am sure the hardcore, bevvy merchant Loyal Citrus Fruit Ludges would buy it by the gallon squared (a nice wee top up on your pitiful GCHQ bungs).

A niche product well worth the schizophrenic pair of you considering?

Sling in some orange juice, and the pair of you will be minted rapid time.

I have visited Buckie Abbey but the Buckie is piss watter. I prefer cider mixed wie lannie or 365.OK David I know you need to keep your sense of humour after the devastation on 19 Sept 2014 and do carry on if it gives you comfort. Did you get councelling to alleviate the trauma?

Twa winters of disconntent have passed since 19 September 2014 and you nat sis are no further on in fact you have given up. Your leadership is taking the money and have sold you out. Fukkin mugs you are.

Johann Lamont, Anas Sarwar, John Reid, Ian Davidson, and Margaret Curran were all prominent in promoting the idea that Scottish shipbuilding jobs would only be safe if shipbuilders voted No, yet none of them have had the courage or decency to comment about this latest in the growing numbers of betrayals of NO voters, by the Better Together Campaign.

Only a snivelling little cap doffer, like our resident troll would be able to look at themselves in a mirror and not admit they have been used as 'useful idiots' by the Tories, after this.

It's all good though, as it shows that even the Westminster Elite know they can't hold onto Scotland for much longer, so have stopped even trying.

Paddie Bhoy you have no interest in Scottish shipyard jobs or indeed others in your quest for independence. Scotland would be a waste yard if we had voted Nat si. The Yards would be closed now along with many other business HQs.And if we leave NATO as you liars really want thousands would lose jobs and the Yanks would pull the plug on Scotland.

Strange how the Scots supposedly do not like shite Tories but vote for the Tartan version who like the blue version will not tax the rich and protect the poor. At least the Blues are honest bastards. And both versions are crawlin tae the EU. You could hardly slip a used condom between them.

I don't think they were played. They were willing misguided careerist politicians who would say anything to protect their alternating (your turn tories, then our turn Labout and our turn in rural areas and occasionally enable one of you Lib Dems). They have begun to pay the price but it's not yet complete. The wings article showing up the Clyde ship jobs is illsutrative of exactly that. labour do the Tories bidding on the ships jobs as Tories are loathed. So, Labour tell them their jobs are in danger if they vote Yes. A No vote is returned and Dugdale reports that the Tories must keep their promise. No promise was ever made. Labour is completely and willingly complicit. No mainstream media report will include this basic cartel, this affront to democracy as they too are complicit as for various reasons they are also part of the greed.

Labour and Lib Dem lied too. Let's hope they get the kick in they deserve.

The only promise given was if ships are to be built it will be on the Clyde. And it should not be forgotten that Rosyth has a workforce dependent on fitting out ships and other related work. Defense changes like the wind however an Independent Scotland would not get Ruk defense contracts.The Scottish Nat sis have to be honest and admit that thousands of Scottish jobs will be lost if we become independent.

An IndyScotland would bin Trident and those 'lost jobs' jobs would go to developing a Scottish Defence Force, to build up our Air and Sea defence... you know, for those assets of ours in the North Eea that are currently unprotected, unless we can afford to wait for the wanks downstairs to send us a submarine from the SOUTH COAST OF ENGLAND?

Kezia desperately trying to deflect blame for the shipbuilding fiasco onto her Tory friends, but Nicola points out that people wouldn't have believed promises made by the Tories, but they did believe the promises because they were made by Labour MP/MSP's.

Labour betrayed the Shipbuilders, just like Labour has betrayed every other group in Scotland, because when all is said and done, the people who 'make it' in Scottish Labour (no laughing at the back) are the people who are prepared to sell out their own.

People who care about Scotland and who will expose corruption or practices that harm Scots (like transferring large chunks of Scottish Waters into England's hands or keeping the McCrone report secret) are quickly driven out of the party.

When you read GWC2's comments they ooze contempt for Scotland, so it's no wonder he is one of the dwindling number of useful idiots or low information voters (to give them their polite name) who still think Labour care about Scotland.

Another day, another time, when McGibbon reaches for his Vaseline and greases his erse up before bending over for his Tory betters.

We are in a situation where we have unionists voting SNP and Green - presumably because of some of their popular left wing policies. When it comes to the union, they will vote no in any secession referendum.

The SNP itself is slowly becoming a unionist party. No referendum in the next parliament, the 56 living it up in Westminster. They are even drifting into economic conservatism - low taxes prioritised over wealth redistribution. In future UK parliaments, they will quite possibly join with Labour to form governments.

Considering all of this, the modern SNP are simply Scottish Labour rebranded.